Allowed

M/S the Jevra Adarsh Coop L/C Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana etc.

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Mar 2012ARB/31/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An arbitration petition filed for the appointment of an arbitrator in a public works contract dispute. The court allowed the petition, directing the Engineer-in-Chief to appoint an arbitrator contingent on the petitioner furnishing the required security amount within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Engineer-in-Chief, Haryana, PWD B&R to appoint an Arbitrator conditional on the petitioner furnishing security within two months.

M/S the Jevra Adarsh Coop L/C Society Ltd. Vs State of… — Arbitration | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Arbitration Case No. 31 of 2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Arbitration Case No.31 of 2011

¶5

Date of decision:- 16.03.2012

¶6

M/s Jevra Adarsh Co-op. L/C Society Ltd.

¶7

...... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

The State of Haryana etc.

¶10

.....Respondents

¶11

CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

¶12

Present: Mr. Yovan Sharma, Advocate, for Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶13

Ms. Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana, for the respondents.

¶14

HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶15

The petitioner was granted contract for special

¶16

repair/replacement of deck slab of existing bridge over Loharu canal at RD 1120 on Dadri Ghikara Road in District Bhiwani vide communication dated 24.07.2008. The time limit to complete the works was three months. As per the petitioner, the respondents have not handed over the site to the petitioner, which led to the non-completion of project within time granted, whereas on behalf of the respondents, it is alleged that the petitioner failed to complete the work and a penalty of Rs.72,000/- was also imposed on 03.04.2009.

¶17

The petitioner served a notice dated 15.06.2009 to the Engineer-in-Chief, Haryana, PWD B&R, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh with copy to the Executive Engineer, PWD B&R, Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani. But since no Arbitrator was appointed, the petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of this Court for appointment of an Arbitrator.

¶18

In reply on behalf of the respondents, it is pleaded that the

¶19

Arbitration Case No. 31 of 2011 2

¶20

petitioner has failed to start and complete the work even after lapse of 10 months as against the scheduled period of three months. Reference is made to various communications vide which the petitioner was called upon to start and complete the work. It is also pointed out that in terms of the Agreement, the petitioner has to apply to the Engineer-in-Charge for settlement of disputes and if the same is declined, then to apply for appointment of an Arbitrator. It is pointed out that the petitioner has not applied to the Engineer-in-Charge nor deposited the security in terms of Clause (25A.5) of the agreement, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to seek appointment of an Arbitrator.

¶21

There exists dispute between the parties, as to whether which of the party is a defaulter in performance of the contract granted to the petitioner vide letter dated 24.07.2008. The petitioner has sought appointment of an Arbitrator vide notice dated 15.06.2009. A copy of the said notice was also sent to the Executive Engineer. It is the said Executive Engineer, who is the Executive Engineer-in-Charge as per Clause 25A of the agreement. Therefore, the petitioner has complied with the terms of the Agreement. In respect of non-deposit of the security amount, the same can be made condition precedent before an Arbitrator is appointed.

¶22

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed with a direction to the Engineer-in-Chief, Haryana, PWD B&R, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh to appoint an Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties, if the petitioner furnishes the security amount in terms of Clause (25A.5) of the Agreement within a period of two months from today.

¶23

Disposed of accordingly.

¶24

(HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE

¶25

16.03.2012 Vimal

M/S the Jevra Adarsh Coop L/C Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S the Jevra Adarsh Coop L/C Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaswinder Singh @ Lakhbir Singh Vs State of Punjab

M/S Gawar Construction Co. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

M/S Skylark Cagers International Vs Post Graduate Institute of Medical Edu. and Researech

M/S R.N. Metals Vs Haryana Power Generation Corporation Ltd.

Ashok Kumar Garg Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

(O&M) Ram Devi & Ors. Vs Chaman Lal